“... We can only speculate as to the precise content of the Eucharistic prayers, which probably did not include the words of institution (Buchanan 2007a: 236) and to which Justin refers as being improvised (1 Apol. 67.5, see above). This is a significant difference from the Didache discussed above. Similarly to Justin (1 Apol. 66.1), the Didache is ex plicit in restricting the consumption of the Eucharist to those who have been baptized. As a reason for this restriction, the author refers to a saying ascribed to the Lord: ‘Do not give the holy (to hagion) to dogs’ (Did. 9:5). We do not have conclusive evidence to de cide whether what we are dealing with here is primarily a social norm, signifying group exclusivism, or a belief in the Eucharist as equipped with a special quality. While the historical context may support the first option (see Sandt 2015), drawing on the theor etical framework elaborated above, we should not exclude the second. Since the rigidity of the prayers counts among those aspects of ritualization which intuitively contribute to a ritual being evaluated as more effective, the blessing of the bread and wine by a fixed (rather than improvised) prayer can easily come to be perceived as the prayer somehow altering the elements. The Eucharistic theology advanced by the author of the Didache suffers from a ser ious disadvantage, however. Contrary to the rest of the sources discussed here, the meal elements are not related to, compared to or identified with the body and blood of Jesus. ...”